public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
To: Sami Imseih <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Clean up NamedLWLockTranche stuff
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 18:57:51 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA5RZ0ueB84OUews-mS0+ojeWaDtcoV1qY4CNZD8PrdGcaXW-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]>
	<acVEqGemyK-Yjswa@nathan>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAA5RZ0ueB84OUews-mS0+ojeWaDtcoV1qY4CNZD8PrdGcaXW-g@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks!

On 26/03/2026 18:34, Sami Imseih wrote:
>> I propose the attached refactorings to make this less confusing. See
>> commit messages for details.
> 
> I only took a look at 0001 so far, and I do agree with this statement
> in the commit message:
> 
> "The "user defined" term was already used in LWTRANCHE_FIRST_USER_DEFINED,
> so let's standardize on that to mean tranches allocated with either
> RequestNamedLWLockTranche() or LWLockNewTrancheId()."
> 
> I do wonder if 0001 is going far enough though.
> 
> Instead of just standardizing that "user defined" could mean tranches allocated
> with RequestNamedLWLockTranche() or LWLockNewTrancheId(), how about we also
> rename these APIs to reflect that as well? This way we remove all concept of
> "named tranche" which is what it sounds like to me you are proposing.
> 
> rename RequestNamedLWLockTranche() to RequestUserDefinedLWLockTranche()
> and LWLockNewTrancheId() to RegisterUserDefinedLWLockTranche()

I'd rather not change RequestNamedLWLockTranche(), because I think 
LWLockNewTrancheId() is better and should be used in new code. I 
consider RequestNamedLWLockTranche() to be a legacy function, for 
backwards compatibility.

> RequestNamedLWLockTranche() requests the lwlock at shmem_request time,
> which is later registered via LWLockNewTrancheId() when lwlocks are
> initialized by the postmaster.
> 
> Also, the name LWLockNewTrancheId() is selling what this function does
> too short.
> It does return a new tranche ID, but it also takes in a user-defined tranche
> name and copies ("registers") that name into LWLockTrancheNames.
> 
> v19 is already changing the signature of LWLockNewTrancheId(), so maybe
> improving the names of these APIs makes sense to do.

Oh, I didn't realize we changed the LWLockNewTrancheId() signature! 
Yeah, if we're changing it anyway, we might as well rename it. I'm not 
sure if I like RegisterUserDefinedLWLockTranche() better, but let's 
think it through.

- Heikki

view thread (14+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Clean up NamedLWLockTranche stuff
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox